of paintings of course... was the sheer number of photographs taken. It seemed like everywhere I went, every painting from a neoclassical masterpiece to of course the da vinci with the sly smile, a person was taking a picture. A picture with flash. That is against the rules, but they seemed to allow it anyways.
Being there for two full days, I began to grow tired a little bit of my own research and began to observe the activity of the tourists. In front of the mona lisa, a horde gathered. It seemed as if she was the greatest star there ever was. I wondered... why did they want a picture. Everyone stood behind velvet curtains ten feet away from a wooden banister, which was five feet in front of six inch bullet proof glass. Behind that was the Mona lisa. Or perhaps a body double, a stand in for the painting.
What was to be gained from photographing this original piece of art? Why did the act of replicating it, moronically with a high tech device seem so important. I assume that they might show their crappy reproduction as indelible proof... I was there, in front of the Mona Lisa. But what a shitty stand in for a unmediated presence. Wouldn't better to just look at the painting, with the fullness of one's body, eye, taking in slowly every sensation so as to recognize the complexity of the composition, color, etc? That you couldn't get close to the painting is besides the point.
The crowd itself was far more interesting to look at then the mona lisa. Camera's in the air, each one an extension of the same desire. The writhing bodies pressed together creating a mass that was one large mob blob. An image perhaps ideal for a contemporary version of a large scale history painting of many interlocking figures. I took a picture of this mob blob... feeling a tap on my shoulder I turn to see a security person telling me "No pictures of the people please". You have got to be kidding me. At this point this crowd is no longer any one person but some abstract form ripe for a social theory essay.
No comments:
Post a Comment